SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JohnM who wrote (41083)8/31/2002 1:08:43 AM
From: greenspirit  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Glad you enjoyed the review John. I couldn't agree more. Kagan wrote an outstanding piece. It hardly seems worth my time reading the book after reading the review carefully. :)

I was so impressed I decided to click around the web and see if he had written any other insightful pieces related to foreign affairs. Found this interesting article describing the reason America and Europe differ so much on the use of military force.

Power and Weakness

By Robert Kagan
policyreview.org

It is time to stop pretending that Europeans and Americans share a common view of the world, or even that they occupy the same world. On the all-important question of power — the efficacy of power, the morality of power, the desirability of power — American and European perspectives are diverging. Europe is turning away from power, or to put it a little differently, it is moving beyond power into a self-contained world of laws and rules and transnational negotiation and cooperation. It is entering a post-historical paradise of peace and relative prosperity, the realization of Kant’s “Perpetual Peace.” The United States, meanwhile, remains mired in history, exercising power in the anarchic Hobbesian world where international laws and rules are unreliable and where true security and the defense and promotion of a liberal order still depend on the possession and use of military might. That is why on major strategic and international questions today, Americans are from Mars and Europeans are from Venus: They agree on little and understand one another less and less. And this state of affairs is not transitory — the product of one American election or one catastrophic event. The reasons for the transatlantic divide are deep, long in development, and likely to endure. When it comes to setting national priorities, determining threats, defining challenges, and fashioning and implementing foreign and defense policies, the United States and Europe have parted ways. much more including in the link above.

In regard to partisan writing, you might find this website useful. It ranks the pundit writers daily and scores them based on their partisan comments.

lyinginponds.com

Looks like Paul Krugman from the NYT is leading the pack.



To: JohnM who wrote (41083)8/31/2002 1:19:36 AM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
The NY Times reports on the NEA lesson plan controversy:

Lesson Plans for Sept. 11 Offer a Study in Discord
By KATE ZERNIKE

The anniversary of Sept. 11 has set off the latest skirmish in the classroom culture wars.

On one side are school districts, universities and organizations across the country that have produced lesson plans for the day that try to teach everything from what snacks to eat for mental health to the traditions of Islam.

On the other side are those, mostly conservatives, who say these plans spend too much time talking about feelings and not enough time teaching history and civics — if they teach anything at all. They say the lessons are too focused on teaching tolerance and are unwilling to cast judgment or assign blame. In bending over backward to help students understand the ideology behind the attacks, they say, educators have gone so far as to be unpatriotic.

The National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers' union, came under so much fire for a suggested lesson plan on tolerance that it has removed the material from its Web site. Yesterday, a Washington research group released curriculum written largely by conservatives, including William J. Bennett and Lynne Cheney, to counter what it called "the dangerous idea of moral equivalence" and "the usual pap about diversity" in other lesson plans.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/31/education/31TEAC.html

Tell me, now that the New York Times has reported that the controversial material was yanked from the NEA website, is it true? or to use your favorite word, "credible"?